W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > January 2013

Resolving remaining issues in the issue tracker

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 21:40:25 -0500
Message-ID: <50EA3599.5010803@digitalbazaar.com>
To: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Hey folks,

I did a sweep through the open issues that we have in the issue tracker.
Here are the proposals that I think will have consensus among the group.
Just capturing it all in one place to make our discussion this Thursday
go a bit more smoothly:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ISSUE-143: Prefixes too complicated
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/143

We discussed this issue and made a number of resolutions. We're awaiting
feedback from Tab before sending him an official response.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ISSUE-144: Add @itemref-like attribute
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/144

An experimental feature has been added to HTML+RDFa 1.1 called "Property
Copying" which achieves what Microdata's @itemref achieves.

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-in-html/Overview-src.html

PROPOSAL: Adopt the 'Property Copying' feature as described in the
2013-01-06 HTML+RDFa Editors Draft.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ISSUE-145: @content override @value
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/145

PROPOSAL: When both @content and @value appear on the same HTML element,
the value of @content MUST be used.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ISSUE-146: HTML5+RDFa needs rule for implied @about="" on head/body	
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/146

No it doesn't, we resolved this here:

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2011-12-08#resolution_2

RESOLVED: Modify HTML+RDFa and XHTML+RDFa to modify processing steps #5
and #6 from assuming an empty @about value to assuming that new subject
is set to the parent object.

We messed up and included that rule in XHTML+RDFa 1.1. We should publish
a PER for that spec with the rules for an empty about="" on HEAD and BODY.

PROPOSAL: Close issue 146 with no change to HTML+RDFa. Remove the rules
for injecting an empty about="" for XHTML+RDFa and issue a PER for that
document.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ISSUE-147: Preserve markup by default
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/147

We are trying to get Sebastian on an RDFa WG telecon so that we can
discuss this issue with him in more depth. However, a number of the WG
members have voiced their reservations about changing this behavior in
HTML+RDFa 1.1.

PROPOSAL: Do not change the HTML+RDFa 1.1 rules to preserve markup by
default.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: The Problem with RDF and Nuclear Power
http://manu.sporny.org/2012/nuclear-rdf/
Received on Monday, 7 January 2013 02:40:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:58 UTC